I've gotten in trouble for speculating this way before, but: 9-to-5 what happened was, Whitten suggested someone interview himself. the GD powers thought about it, and said, "no, that won't do." Whitten, or someone, said, "but look, you can't just ignore Erin Hills -- maybe it's not eligible for an award, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist." they thought it over and proposed something like -- this.
I think it's not coincidental that this was a "Web exclusive," or whatever Golf Digest called it.
I can't prove this, but believe it: There's more editorial integrity when things are committed to actual paper and not just to its cyber-equivalent.
yeah, since some editors don't really think of the world wide web as actually existing, they figured it was a good place to stick this story. a bit iffy, but I think it's a little silly to call the guy out -- really, it's not like it's a second-rate course that's unworthy of coverage, is it?
Tom D., I'm a little surprised at your reaction. I suppose I can understand your feeling somewhat piqued, but given how much you write for the magazines -- leaving aside how much of your business comes from golf course design, compared to Whitten's -- your carping doesn't seem appropriate.
you can't say that *your* byline appearing on a more or less regular basis in a national golf magazine doesn't amount to some kind of endorsement, nor adds cachet. don't I recall you listing one or two of your own designs in some T&LG "best links courses" piece? I wouldn't be surprised if that's what inspired (provoked) Whitten.
frankly as far as I'm concerned there's already too many golf writers, I'd be happy if you both went back to sketching and bulldozing full time.